DeepSeek Harnessvstemporal
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| DeepSeek Harness | temporal | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 87/100 | 82/100 |
| Rank in category | #3 of 209 in AI Agents | #1 of 1 in Workflow |
| GitHub stars | 265 053 | 24 052 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +9 061 | +774 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 0 | 11 |
| Latest release | — | v1.30.8 · 12 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Moderate | Advanced |
| Official Docker image | No | Yes |
| License | MIT | MIT |
| Main language | Typescript | Go |
Which one should you pick?
DeepSeek Harness scores 87/100 against 82/100 for temporal, so it is the safer default.
temporal ships more often: 11 stable releases in the past year, against 0 for DeepSeek Harness.
If you want the quickest setup, DeepSeek Harness is easier to run; temporal needs more configuration.
DeepSeek Harness is growing faster right now (+9 061 stars in 30 days).
DeepSeek Harness details →temporal details →